New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 66-7-203 (2026)

Duty to give information and render aid

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person or damage to any vehicle which is driven or attended by any person shall give his name, address and the registration number of the vehicle he is driving and shall upon request exhibit his driver's license to the person struck or the driver or occupant of or person attending any vehicle collided with and shall render to any person injured in such accident reasonable assistance, including the carrying, or the making of arrangements for the carrying, of such person to a physician, surgeon or hospital for medical or surgical treatment if it is apparent that such treatment is necessary or if such carrying is requested by the injured person.

History: 1953 Comp., § 64-7-203, enacted by Laws 1978, ch. 35, § 392.

ANNOTATIONS

Proof required for conviction. — In order to convict defendant of accidents involving death or personal injuries, the state was required to prove that defendant: (1) operated a motor vehicle; (2) was involved in an accident which caused great bodily harm or death of the victim; (3) failed to stop and/or failed to remain at the scene of the accident; and (4) failed to render reasonable aid to the victim. State v. Guzman, 2004-NMCA-097, 136 N.M. 253, 96 P.3d 1173, cert. denied, 2004-NMCERT-008, 136 N.M. 492, 100 P.3d 197.

"Involved in an accident" construed. — The plain meaning of "involved in an accident," within the context of the statute as a whole, applies to more than collisions. Our legislature intended the statutory phrase "involved in an accident" to be interpreted more broadly based on a recognition that the underlying policy objectives of the hit-and- run statute is to prohibit drivers from evading criminal or civil liability, to ensure people receive necessary aid or medical attention, and to deter drivers from thwarting or impeding investigations and avoiding liability for the harm they cause by failing to stop or failing to comply with this section. State v. Hertzog, 2020-NMCA-031. The district court properly instructed the jury on "involved in an accident". — Where defendant was charged with leaving the scene of an accident resulting in great bodily harm or death based on evidence that during a drive, an argument began between defendant and his girlfriend (victim) where the victim punched defendant in the face and jumped out of the moving vehicle that defendant was driving, and although defendant was aware that the victim had jumped out of the truck, he did not stop at or near the scene to investigate the victim's condition, report the incident, provide identification, or render assistance, and where, at trial, defendant claimed that the given jury instruction for leaving the scene of an accident was improper and that a proper instruction should equate "accident" with "collision", the district court did not err by refusing to give defendant's proposed instruction because the term "accident" should not be limited to collisions, thereby excluding other types of accidents that seriously injure or, as in this case, kill a person. State v. Hertzog, 2020-NMCA-031.

Sufficient evidence of leaving the scene of an accident. — Where defendant was charged with leaving the scene of an accident resulting in great bodily harm or death based on evidence that during a drive, an argument began between defendant and his girlfriend (victim) where the victim punched defendant in the face and jumped out of the moving vehicle that defendant was driving, and although defendant was aware that the victim had jumped out of the truck, he did not stop at or near the scene to investigate the victim's condition, report the incident, provide identification, or render assistance, there was sufficient evidence to support defendant's conviction where the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was the driver of a motor vehicle involved in an accident which resulted in the death of the victim, that defendant knew that there was an accident, that defendant knowingly failed to stop his vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close as possible without obstructing traffic more than necessary, and that defendant knowingly failed to comply with the requirements of § 66-7-203 NMSA 1978. State v. Hertzog, 2020-NMCA-031.

Where defendant was charged with leaving the scene of an accident involving personal injuries (no great bodily harm or death), and where the evidence presented at trial established that a vehicle driven by defendant collided with another vehicle, that the driver of the second vehicle was ejected and severely injured, that shortly after the collision, several drivers stopped and unsuccessfully attempted to render aid to the injured driver, who died shortly thereafter from his injuries, that defendant got out of his car, began pacing back and forth, and then left the scene on foot before the first emergency responder arrived, there was sufficient evidence to permit a reasonable jury to conclude that each element of leaving the scene of an accident was established beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Esparza, 2020-NMCA-050, cert. denied.

There was sufficient evidence to convict defendant for leaving the scene of an accident where the evidence established that defendant, while under the influence of methamphetamine and heroin, drove across a parking lot at a high rate of speed, struck two individuals in her path causing severe injuries, and fled the scene, and where defendant's interview with the police contained numerous admissions that she was driving the white vehicle in question, that she knew she struck at least one person with it, that she then left the parking lot without stopping to render assistance, and that she abandoned the vehicle at the end of a residential street about a half-mile away. State v. Holtsoi, 2024-NMCA-042, cert. denied.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 7A Am. Jur. 2d Automobiles and Highway Traffic §§ 289 to 295, 766.

Validity and construction of statute making it a criminal offense for the operator of a motor vehicle not to carry or display his operator's license or the vehicle registration certificate, 6 A.L.R.3d 506.

Sufficiency of showing of driver's involvement in motor vehicle accident to support prosecution for failure to stop, furnish identification, or render aid, 82 A.L.R.4th 232.

Necessity and sufficiency of showing, in criminal prosecution under "hit-and-run" statute, accused's knowledge of accident, injury, or damage, 26 A.L.R.5th 1.

61A C.J.S. Motor Vehicles §§ 652, 661, 674.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2000–2024 · leading case: State v. Esparza, 2020 NMCA 050 (N.M. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Esparza, 2020 NMCA 050 (N.M. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 62× “n of NMSA 1978, Section 66-8-101 (2004, amended 2016); leaving the scene of an accident involving personal injuries but not great bodily harm or death, in violation of Section 66-7-201(D); leaving the scene of an accident involving damage to a vehicle, in violation of NMSA 1978,…”
State v. Hertzog, 2020 NMCA 031 (N.M. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 13× “8} Section 66-7-201(A) provides: The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person shall immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close thereto as possible, but shall then immediately return to and in every…”
State v. Cumpton, 1 P.3d 429 (N.M. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 6× “Section 66-7-201(B) states: Any person failing to stop or to comply with the requirements of Section 66-7-203 NMSA 1978 where the accident results in great bodily harm or death is guilty of a fourth degree felony and shall be sentenced pursuant to the provisions of Section…”
United States v. Diaz, 679 F.3d 1183 (10th Cir. 2012). · cites it 3× “The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person shall immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close thereto as possible, but shall then immediately return to and in every event shall remain at the scene of…”
Benavidez v. Shutiva, 2015 NMCA 065 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 5× “Plaintiff does not dispute that the motor home hit his truck 3 and that he did not immediately stop.”
State v. Nieto, 536 P.3d 534 (N.M. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “See § 66-7- 202; NMSA 1978, § 66-7-203 (1978). The State was thus required under its theory of the case to present proof of conduct for each crime that was different and distinct from the conduct required under the State’s theory to establish the other crime.”
State v. Guzman, 2004 NMCA 97 (N.M. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “NMSA 1978, § 66-7-201 (1989); NMSA 1978, § 66-7-203 (1978). Defendant, while driving her truck, collided with the victim and admitted that she thought he could have been a person on a bicycle.”
State v. Melo-Fernandez (N.M. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 30× “Defendant knowingly failed to comply with the requirements of [NMSA 1978,] Section 66-7-203 [(1978)] by not giving his name, address, and the registration number of the vehicle he was driving to the person struck or driver or occupant of or any person attending to the vehicle…”
State v. Melo-Fernandez (N.M. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 28× “Defendant knowingly failed to comply with the requirements of 19 [NMSA 1978,] Section 66-7-203 [(1978)] by not giving his 20 name, address, and the registration number of the vehicle he was 21 driving to the person struck or driver or occupant of or any person 22 attending to…”
Benavidez v. Shutiva, 2015 NMCA 65 (N.M. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 5× “Plaintiff 9 does not dispute that the motor home hit his truck and that he did not immediately stop.”
State v. Nieto (N.M. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 6× “14 See § 66-7-202; NMSA 1978, § 66-7-203 (1978). The State was thus required under 15 its theory of the case to present proof of conduct for each crime that was different 16 and distinct from the conduct required under the State’s theory to establish the other 17 crime.”
State v. Munoz (N.M. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 8× “The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting 21 in injury to or death of any person shall immediately stop the vehicle at 22 the scene of the accident or as close thereto as possible, but shall then 5 1 immediately return to and in every event shall remain at the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.